Thanks, Howard, for posting the “theater vs. theatre” passage from CT’s guides. Hopefully that settles this tempest in a teapot. As for the management of the Paradise mispelling the word… both spellings are acceptable according to the Miriam-Webster and American Heritage dictionaries. No need to insult the folks in charge of the Paradise for no good reason.

And thanks, Ken, for at long last providing a proper and fitting introduction for this great palace!

In an otherwise splendid introduction, I question the description of the renovated Paradise as “a Latino theatre and special events venue.” I don’t quite get that bit, except as relates to the predominant ethnicity of the Fordham neighborhood in which the Paradise is situated.

I haven’t seen anything in the events booked so far — or on the theater’s official website — that would justify describing the Paradise as a specifically Latino venue.

I can’t speak for long time advocates of the Paradise, but if somebody came to us (Friends of the Boyd in Philadelphia) and said they’d fund millions for the restoration, but contrary to Opening in 1928 (Boyd Theatre), it will be Boyd Theater, we’d be thrilled!

Any of you harping on this trivial point who didn’t actually fund the restoration of the Paradise? The funds did not come from Loews either (vintage photo posted in Intro.

Ed, as to theater vs US and theatre for the British, no, they did not.

You can find the Guidelines by visiting “Add Theaters”

Theater vs Theatre
When a theater name contains “theatre” or “theater”, use the name provided by the theater in question. Do not deviate from a theater’s official name or listing.
When referring to a theater in the generic sense, always use “theater” â€" unless you are referring to a theater by its name.
For European theaters, as well as those in Australia, the term “cinema” should be used instead of “theater” or “theatre”.

Didn’t Patrick and Ross post a news item recently about new format guidelines for theatre (that’s my choice of spelling for the generic use of the word) descriptions, wherein they formally announced that CT would adopt the American custom of spelling the word with “er” at for US cinemas and with the appropriate “re” for cinemas in the UK? If so, I think that pretty much settles the issue as to the generic use of the word to describe the building. I would think that those guides also apply as defaults for the name of any particular cinema where the “official” spelling of the name can not be verified.

For the Paradise, we do have the official website as our guide – and therefore the “er” prevails.

I’ve read too many comments above- and on other theater pages, about the “theater” vs. theatre" spelling. ENOUGH! Please- NO more debates about this trivial point. This movie palace was saved, restored, and reopened! That should be enough.

The official website says Paradise Theater, with no “Utopia” in front.

As far as actually relying on Wikipedia for reliable info, well, I’m still trying to control the laughter on that one. Any doofus anywhere in the world can post whatever he likes on Wikipedia. If you look at the photo of the Paradise Theatre at the top of this page you’ll see what spelling Loew’s preferred. Okay. It’s been fun, and I’m done.

Theater is the prevailing American spelling and is used by America’s national theater as well as major American newspapers such as the New York Times (theater section) to refer to both the dramatic arts as well as to buildings where performances take place; yet theatre is also current, witness Broadway and The New Yorker. Some places in the United States have “Centre” in their names (i.e. Rockville Centre, New York), named both before and after spelling reform, and there are very occasional uses of “Center” in England [4]). For British accoutre(ment), US practice varies: Merriam-Webster favours the -re spelling,[27] American Heritage the -er spelling.[28]

In short, if you would read my post from 2:32 today, (with apologies to dave-bronx) a building in which theater takes place is called a “T-H-E-A-T-R-E”, and just because someone wants to spell it with an “E-R” on the end, doesn’t change the way the english language works, it just means they aren’t aware of how it works.

Well, if by “theater”, they simply mean some corporation that runs and owns the “theatre” then it doesn’t need correcting at all, but if we aren’t even going to insist on correct usage of spelling and words, then why not just call the building “sohjdeijnvaoi”? Words mean things, and the way they are spelled affects (or should eye say “effects”) there meening. Since their iz a write and wrong whey to spell, Y not dew it write?

It was with the Russian gentleman in the Spring of 2006, I assume this is the current occupant. It wasn’t just the drywall, they had raised the floor as well which created a height problem due to the projection angle, but that could be dealt with.

Regarding programming, we had a full summer and autumn schedule worked out with classics and first-run, the idea was to try and see if there was enough interest to continue on a regular basis or just on an infrequent basis. We were willing to tackle all the film costs and promotion, the Paradise just needed to open the doors. The kibosh was apparently put on it by the technical director at the time, who had his own designs on the place if the current management failed.

Regarding the projection equipment offer. Was that with the prior manager or during the current one, Joseph Gentile? IMHO, the removal of the drywall for the booth would be easy. It’s the booth A/C and electric that would be most costly.

Do you think tik sales would be sufficient to cover operating expenses? What kind of program would attract audience big enough? Old films, new or a mix of both?

Also see the Jersey City Loews Jersey for a active film program. This March 1 they are having a Bette Davis salute. $6 tik tops.

Well, they did the conversion during their big renovation, which was prior to us making the offer of the gear back in the spring of 2006. They would need to turn the center box back into a small booth to show films, which would involve some reconstruction. Not likely at this point, from what we were told.

Hmmmm. Converting the booth to a luxury box strikes me as a rather short-sighted move. Why not keep the booth in reserve – and take up the generous offer of free equipment – just to maintain the Paradise’s capacity to run a film or series of films should the prospects for such an event ever arise? So much for the hopes of ever catching a flick at what we can now safely describe as a FORMER movie palace?

The Paradise was offered a complete working 35mm setup at no charge (as well as the programming of a full classic film series schedule) a few years ago and was not interested. Sadly, the original booth has been converted into “luxury boxes”, so there would need to be construction to accommodate projection gear.